Re: The Religious Rights' Unreal Understanding of Homo***uality:

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>"Free Lunch" <lunch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:agmc24lusn95lrsgi301d3e3s3aorpjbf3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> You have to remember that many cultures had no problem with men having
>> more than one ***ual partner. Marriage was an arrangement that had
>> nothing to do with love. ***ual trysts were tolerated, even when the
>> Pope had them. There may be a few gays who are completely unable to
have
>> *** with women, but most are bi***ual to some degree, however small.
>> Doing their culturally required duty may not have been what they
wanted,
>> but that didn't mean they could not.
>
>
>You are defining the exception, I'm talking about the rule. *** is to
make 
>kids, and if so then *** must include opposite gender participants. ***
for 
>pleasure is fine and dandy,

So far as we know, "***" exists ONLY for what you call "pleasure" but
what science observes to be the response to instinct.  Our bodies are
usually but not always programmed to be triggered in that instinct
when there is an available and fertile female.  Our instincts are also
triggered by other stimuli, and in the complete absence of the
opposite gender, they will still be triggered.  Sometimes the body
attunes itself to respond to signals from the same gender.  There is
no evidence that this is a "choice".

>The species can not survive on pleasure,

The species in fact does require pleasure in order to survive.

Among other things, these are at least probable if not actually
observed "reasons" for *** that are fully natural.
a) *** reduces aggressive instincts.  In the "natural state", men go
to war.  They kill their enemies and take their women.  This serves
the dual purpose of preserving fertile women from being killed along
with their men, and reducing the aggressive instinct so that the
fighting stops.  
b) in prehistoric hunter societies, the men might be out on a hunt for
days.  Homo***ual *** might then have served as a block on aggressive
instincts that might have led to men killing men.
c) *** for "pleasure" keeps men around to sup****t children and their
mothers even when the mothers aren't fertile.
d) homo***ual *** can serve to relieve the instinctive pressure to
have *** when scarce resources (overpopulation) make it biologically
risky to add more children (presumably in such situations, women don't
trigger ***ual desire as regularly.

>therefore pleasure must be a chosen goal.

No.  Pleasure is the only goal.  The only issue is how many
cir***stances can cause the pleasure.

>The pure animal in us says that we have *** to have more kids.

No.  It is a fair bet that no animal having *** is thinking about kids
at the time.  They are thinking about fulfilling their biological
desire.

>Instinct says that homo***uality will not further the species, 

Instinct says no such thing.

>therefore some of us chose to defy instinct.

Nonsense.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Lojban language www.lojban.org